By Aare Amerijoye DOT.B
Let us speak without ornament, without hesitation, and without the cowardice of political politeness, this presidency is not standing on strength, nor is it anchored in any overwhelming national consensus that confers moral certainty. It is standing, quite precariously, on a fracture that is both measurable and undeniable. Not a metaphorical fracture designed for rhetorical flourish, but a verifiable, electoral, structural fracture rooted in the arithmetic of the 2023 presidential election.
Strip away the ceremonies, the carefully choreographed appearances, and the performative symbolism of power, and confront the underlying reality: what sits in Aso Rock today is not the uncontested expression of the Nigerian will, but the mathematical consequence of a divided opposition field. History, in its cold consistency, has never been kind to governments constructed upon temporary arithmetic, particularly when that arithmetic begins to dissolve under the weight of new political alignments and lived realities.
Facts are stubborn, and numbers are even more resistant to manipulation than narratives. Bola Ahmed Tinubu secured 8,794,726 votes, while Atiku Abubakar recorded 6,984,520 votes, Peter Obi secured 6,101,533 votes, and Rabiu Kwankwaso obtained 1,496,687 votes. When these figures are combined, they amount to 14,582,740 votes cast for alternative candidates.
This is not an interpretation, nor is it a partisan distortion; it is INEC-certified electoral data. The implication is mathematically clear and politically profound: more Nigerians voted for alternatives than for the declared winner. What ultimately delivered victory was not national consensus but electoral fragmentation, and fragmentation, by its very nature, is not a durable political asset. It is a temporary accident of circumstance. As Nelson Mandela rightly observed, power is not a trophy to be claimed by accident; it is a responsibility to be justified through performance. It is precisely this burden of justification that now rests heavily, and increasingly uncomfortably, upon this presidency.
From its very inception, this administration made a consequential strategic choice that now defines its trajectory: it prioritised political control while delaying the deeper, more demanding work of structural correction. While Nigerians expected clarity, coherence, and a carefully sequenced economic transition, what they encountered instead was a sequence of policy shocks implemented without sufficient cushioning mechanisms.
The removal of petrol subsidy in 2023, though long debated, was executed without the parallel development of robust social buffers capable of absorbing its immediate impact. Exchange rate liberalisation followed, but rather than stabilisation, it was accompanied by significant currency depreciation. Inflation, particularly in food and transportation, has persisted at levels that strain household resilience, while the cost of communication and other essential services has continued to rise.
These are not speculative claims; they are observable economic outcomes reflected in daily life across markets and communities. As Prof Wole Soyinka warned, the man dies in all who keep silent in the face of tyranny. Nigerians are no longer silent; they are observing, adapting, recalibrating, and increasingly drawing conclusions.
The strategic blueprint that underpinned this presidency was neither hidden nor complex. It was built on a straightforward assumption: divide the opposition, ensure that Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi remained in separate political lanes, and secure victory through the persistence of fragmentation. That blueprint, however, is now under visible strain. Political signals across the country increasingly point towards dialogue, alignment, and a growing recognition of shared electoral interests among previously distinct political forces.
The same actors who operated independently in 2023 are becoming more conscious of the weight of their combined strength, and the arithmetic remains undeniable: together, they already outpolled the sitting president. The greatest danger in politics is not opposition itself; it is the complacent assumption that opposition will remain perpetually divided. That assumption is eroding, and with it, the strategic foundation upon which this presidency was constructed.
It is necessary, at this point, to confront directly the counter-argument frequently advanced by defenders of the current order, namely that defections into the APC signify expansion and strength. Yes, defections into the APC exist, and that is a matter of record. However, politics cannot be reduced to a mere counting exercise of who moves where; it is fundamentally about the character, motivation, and implications of those movements. When sitting governors defect, they often do so with the weight of state machinery, institutional pressure, and the practical considerations of political survival within a centralised federal structure. This is neither new nor unique within Nigerian political history.
achieve it. The variables that shape political outcomes are not static; they evolve in response to events, decisions, and public sentiment. Opposition dialogue is increasing, political actors are repositioning, and the electorate is responding to economic realities that shape perception and expectation. This is not speculation; it is observable trajectory.
As Nelson Mandela noted, it always seems impossible until it is done. Political history is replete with examples of seemingly stable structures that were reconfigured once alignment replaced fragmentation. The question is no longer whether change is possible, but how it will be structured and when it will crystallise.
This presidency rests upon three interdependent pillars: the persistence of opposition fragmentation, the endurance capacity of citizens under economic strain, and the continued control of political structure. Each of these pillars is currently under pressure, and pressure, when applied simultaneously across multiple points, alters the stability of any system.
Opposition fragmentation is being challenged by emerging conversations around alignment. Economic endurance is being tested by sustained hardship. Political control, while still significant, is not immune to shifts in perception and loyalty. When these pressures converge, adjustment becomes inevitable. Power that emerges from division must remain perpetually alert to the possibility of unity, because unity, once consolidated, reshapes outcomes in ways that no amount of control can indefinitely prevent.
This is not an expression of outrage, nor is it an exercise in sentiment or speculation. It is the intersection of electoral arithmetic, economic reality, and observable political movement. Within that intersection, one conclusion continues to take clearer shape: Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress represent a structured pathway through which opposition energy may be translated into coordinated political viability. History does not operate on emotion; it operates on conditions. It does not rush, but it does not retreat. And when it arrives at its moment of convergence, it does not ask permission before it acts.
Aare Amerijoye DOT.B
Director-General, The Narrative Force (TNF)
thenarrativeforce.org
